[Fwd: Re: [css3-namespace] 3.1 Syntax]

(Sorry, forgot to CC www-svg.)

Forwarded message 1

  • From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 10:06:12 -0700
  • Subject: Re: [css3-namespace] 3.1 Syntax
  • To: Erik Dahlstr├Âm <ed@opera.com>
  • CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
  • Message-ID: <47D56A84.50509@inkedblade.net>
Erik Dahlstr÷m wrote:
> Dear CSS WG,
> This is a last call comment from the SVG WG on the CSS Namespaces 
> Module, W3C Working Draft 15 February 2008, 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-css3-namespace-20080215/. Please let us 
> know if you have any questions by CC:ing your responses to www-svg@w3.org.
>> Any @namespace rules must follow all @charset and @import rules and
>> precede all other non-ignored at-rules and rule sets in a style
>> sheet
> Why? What benefit does that provide? 

David Baron explained the reasoning behind this placement in

> What if you want to later define an important @-rule and want it to be
> 'right after' @charset?

Then the spec that defines that @-rule will need to specify its placement
with respect to the @namespace rule and clarify that this rule not cause
any later @namespace rules to be considered invalid.

> Preceding all 'non-ignored' @rules seems rather odd, too.  It makes a
> stylesheet move from valid to invalid

This is a forward-compatible parsing requirement to allow for a new @-rule
to be placed before @namespace. With this requirement, if a later spec
introduces such a rule, UAs compatible with the current spec will ignore it
rather than treating the @namespace rule as invalid.

> Suggestion: Simply state that @namespace rules must precede any rules
> that use namespaces.

Rejected for reasons stated above. Please let me know if this is acceptable
or if I should register this as a Formal Objection.


Received on Monday, 10 March 2008 18:08:01 UTC